They as I understand it want all foreign contact and influence to vanish from the Islamic world, and to establish a new caliphate of Islam, all run by their particular fundamentalist version of Islamic law. So no, there isn’t; they are the kind of rabid fundamentalists who won’t ever really be satisfied. And their goals aren’t really achievable either.
I think I’d need a cite for that alleged agenda? Not from some self-promoting zealot either.
Best I’ve heard from ObL is for the influence of the US to diminish in the Muslim world and for rights the rest of us take for granted to be afforded to the Palestinian people.
The problem I have is that without Al Qaeda the US military - and the immense accompanying industrial system - have run out of enemies to justify their budgets.
On that basis, absolutely the worst thing that could happen - for many people at or close to the centre of power in the US - would be for the US to find ObL and to destroy Al Qaeda, or to come to terms with Al Qaeda.
You got that cite?
Like law enforcement claims of wanting to clean up on crime 100%, military claims of wanting peace are counter-productive to their existence.
Is the most relevant paradigm (for our currnt clusterfuck in Afghanistan). WE have decided that we will determine the government of Afghanistan-as we face an increasingly hostile public. Remember Somalia? The local people really started getting pissed at us-our helicopter overflights destroyed the local markets, and the tolerance for us turned to active hatred. We are follwoing the same path in Afghanistan-already the locals life and property are being threatened by our operations. How much worse will this be, if we have another 80,000 troops there?
I think we need a sober reassessment of what we think we are doing-before we waste more lives and more money.
But…but…that would be dithering! (Or so I hear tell.)
Why do you hate America?
1 (wiki): "Al-Qaeda ideologues envision a complete break from the foreign influences in Muslim countries and the creation of a new Islamic caliphate. Reported beliefs include that a Christian-Jewish alliance is conspiring to destroy Islam,[10] and that the killing of bystanders and civilians is religiously justified in jihad…On February 23, 1998, Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri, a leader of Egyptian Islamic Jihad, along with three other Islamist leaders, co-signed and issued a fatwa (binding religious edict) calling on Muslims to kill Americans and their allies where they can, when they can.[73] Under the banner of the World Islamic Front for Combat Against the Jews and Crusaders they declared:
*[T]he ruling to kill the Americans and their allies—civilians and military—is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque [in Jerusalem] and the holy mosque [in Makka] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty Allah, 'and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together,' and 'fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah'.[74]*
That last is a direct quote from Osama.
Now, as far as what would happen if we caught Osama bin Laden and destroyed the leadership of Al-Qaeda ? Another group would spring up. Likely less well funded, less organized, so likely less dangerous to the USA within our borders. Still- terrorism would continue.
And even if Afghanistan got settled there’d be Somalia or some other nation in anarchy, with horrible daily atrocities, etc.
Always a job for the Marines, somewhere, and they know it.
Do active generals ever say we need less troops? Sometimes you get the truth out of a retired general. They admit long after the war is over that they were not telling the truth. When they are inside they work under crushing political influence. When a war is going on promotions come easier and they make more money and get much better retirement deals. I do not see generals as unbiased . Could McCrystal say “we are wrong being there, lets go home,” and keep his job. The rest of the military would think he was being treasonous.
Yes. General Casey, who was in charge of Iraq before the surge, opposed the surge.
Generals are supposed to fight the wars they’ve been handed them, not make public assessments that they believe that the war is hopeless. The decision about whether to go to war, or when to stop war, is something that is the province of the civilian leadership of the government.